Description

Covenants without Swords examines an enduring tension within liberal theory: that between many liberals' professed commitment to universal equality on the one hand, and their historic support for the politics of hierarchy and empire on the other. It does so by examining the work of two extremely influential British liberals and internationalists, Gilbert Murray and Alfred Zimmern. Jeanne Morefield mounts a forceful challenge to disciplinary boundaries by arguing that this tension, on both the domestic and international levels, is best understood as frequently arising from the same, liberal reformist political aim--namely, the aim of fashioning a socially conscious liberalism that ultimately reifies putatively natural, preliberal notions of paternalistic order.

Morefield also questions conventional analyses of interwar thought by resurrecting the work of Murray and Zimmern, and by linking their approaches to liberal internationalism with the ossified notion of sovereignty that continues to trouble international politics to this day. Ultimately, Morefield argues, these two thinkers' drift toward conservative and imperialist understandings of international order was the result of a more general difficulty still faced by liberals today: how to adequately define community in liberal terms without sacrificing these terms themselves. Moreover, Covenants without Swords suggests that Murray and Zimmern's work offers a cautionary historical example for the cadre of post-September 11th "new imperialists" who believe it possible to combine a liberal commitment to equality with an American Empire.

About the author

Jeanne Morefield is an Assistant Professor of Politics at Whitman College.

Google Play reviews now use Google+ so it's easier to see opinions from people you care about. New reviews will be publicly linked to your Google+ profile. Your name on previous reviews now appears as "A Google User".

Google Play reviews now use Google+ so it's easier to see opinions from people you care about. New reviews will be publicly linked to your Google+ profile. Your name on previous reviews now appears as "A Google User".

Similar

First published in 1991, this is a reissue of the path-breaking Dictionary of Conservative and Libertarian Thought, the first book to examine the ideals and arguments produced by the intellectual traditions of both conservatism and classical liberalism.

Covering the ideas of many such distinguished thinkers as Hayek, Scruton, Friedman and Buchanan, the volume provides a valuable survey of the historical development of both schools of thought in all of the major western countries and their contributions to contemporary debates.

From American Conservatism to French Liberalism, Invisible Hand to Organic Society, from Scientism to Scepticism and Utopianism to Voluntarism, this is a vital work whose reissue will be welcomed as much by the keen layperson as by students of political science, the history of philosophy, economics and public policy.

The end of the Cold War ushered in a moment of nearly pure American dominance on the world stage, yet that era now seems ages ago. Since 9/11 many informed commentators have focused on the relative decline of American power in the global system. While some have welcomed this as a salutary development, outspoken proponents of American power--particularly neoconservatives--have lamented this turn of events. As Jeanne Morefield argues in Empires Without Imperialism, the defenders of a liberal international order steered by the US have both invoked nostalgia for a golden liberal past and succumbed to amnesia, forgetting the decidedly illiberal trajectory of US continental and global expansion. Yet as she shows, the US is not the first liberal hegemon to experience a wave of misguided nostalgia for a bygone liberal order; England had a remarkably similar experience in the early part of the twentieth century. The empires of the US and the United Kingdom were different in character--the UK's was territorially based while the US relied more on pure economic power--yet both nations mouthed the rhetoric of free markets and political liberty. And elites in both painted pictures of the past in which first England and then the US advanced the cause of economic and political liberty throughout the world. Morefield contends that at the times of their decline, elites in both nations utilized the attributes of an imagined past to essentialize the nature of the liberal state. Working from that framework, they bemoaned the possibility of liberalism's decline and suggested a return to a true liberal order as a solution to current woes. By treating liberalism as fixed through time, however, they actively forgot their illiberal pasts as colonizers and economic imperialists. According to Morefield, these nostalgic narratives generate a cynical 'politics in the passive' where the liberal state gets to have it both ways: it is both compelled to act imperially to save the world from illiberalism and yet is never responsible for the outcome of its own illiberal actions in the world or at home. By comparing the practice and memory of liberalism in early nineteenth century England and the contemporary United States, Empires Without Imperialism addresses a major gap in the literature. While there are many examinations of current neoliberal imperialism by critical theorists as well as analyses of liberal imperialism by scholars of the history of political thought, no one has of yet combined the two approaches. It thus provides a much fuller picture of the rhetorical strategies behind liberal imperialist uses of history. At the same time, the book challenges presentist assumptions about the novelty of our current political moment.

"Joseph Scotchie wishes to tell the story of what he terms an "underfunded, mostly unknown movement" known as the "paleoconservative" or "Old Right" which, he argues, has "provided the intellectual firepower behind the troubled populism of the 1990's." And Scotchie is not afraid to ask hard questions." --"The Review of Politics" "An essential and valuable contribution to American intellectual history in the last decade of the last century." -- "The American Conservative" The dominant forces of American conservatism remain wedded, at all costs, to the Republican Party, but another movement, one with its roots in the pre-World War II era, has stepped forth to fill an intellectual vacuum on the right. This Old Right first rose in opposition to the New Deal, fighting both statism at home and the emergence of an American empire abroad. More recently this movement, sometimes called paleoconservatism, has provided the ideological backbone of modern populism and the opposition to globalization, with decisive effects on presidential politics. In "Revolt from the Heartland," Joseph Scotchie provides an intellectual history of the Old Right, treating its main figures and defining its conflict with the traditional left-right political mainstream. As Scotchie's account makes clear, the Old Right and its descendents have articulated an arresting and powerful worldview. They include an array of learned and provocative writers, including M.E. Bradford, Russell Kirk, Richard Weaver, and Murray Rothbard, and more recently, Clyde Wilson, Thomas Fleming, Samuel Francis, and Chilton Williamson, Jr. Beginning with the movement's anti-Federalist forerunners, Scotchie traces its developments over two centuries of American history. In the realm of politics and economics, he examines the anti-imperialist stance against the Spanish-American War and the League of Nations, the split among conservatives on Cold War foreign policy, and the hostility to the socialist orientation of the New Deal. Identifying a number of social and cultural attitudes that define the Old Right, Scotchie finds the most important to be the importance of the classics, a recognition of regional cultures, the primacy of family over state, the moral case against immigration. In general, too, a Tenth Amendment approach to such recurring issues as education, abortion, and school prayer characterizes the group. As Scotchie makes clear, the Old Right and its grass-roots supporters have, and continue to be, a powerful force in modern American politics in spite of a lack of institutional support and media recognition. "Revolt from the Heartland" is an important study of a persisting current in American political life. Joseph Scotchie is the author of "Barbarians in the Saddle: An Intellectual Biography of Richard M. Weaver" and the editor of "The Paleoconservatives: New Voices of the Old Right" and "The Vision of Richard Weaver," all available from Transaction. He is also the author of a biography on the novelist Thomas Wolfe. ""Joe Scotchie's terrific new book solves a Great American Mystery. Why do our conservative intellectuals attack one another more viciously than they do liberals? Why does the splintered movement-Old Right, Neoconservative, New Right, and Beltway Right-behave like old communists who would rather purge each other than carry out the revolution? Why, if a member has some success, as when Pat Buchanan won in New Hampshire in 1996, do the rest attack him until they have assured his defeat? It's an incredible story and you have to read the book to find the answer""-William J. Quirk, Professor of Law, "University of South Carolina" ""As an immigrant, I have always regarded the American conserative movement as the flower of democracy, the real reason for the Free World's victory in the Cold War. But flowers do not grow to the sky and the historic conservative movement is clearly now dead. In this remarkable and erudite account, Joseph Scothie investigates the new shoots that are coming up, traces their roots, and analyzes their future-and America's.""-Peter Brimelow, author of "Alien Nation: Common Sense About America's Immigration Disaster" ""With truly masterful precision, Joe Scotchie illuminates the myriad dissident strains of American Conservatism which knocked at the doors of power at the end of the Cold War before meeting a fateful rebuff. He tells the story of those distinctive Right wing intellectuals who said "no" to an imperial foreign policy, mass immigration, and a globalized economy. While this band lost the key internecine battles of the 1990s to Newt Gingrich the neoconvervatives, and the politics of Clinton-bashing, in Scotchie' eloquent account their struggle for a conservatism rooted a sense of measure and respect for the American past retains all its piquancy for the decade to come.""-Scott McConnell

Conservative and liberal political impulses have contended throughout the history of the United States, although there are no major Conservative or Liberal parties in the United States. Instead, the terms signify general inclinations and prejudices encouraged to some degree within all major political parties. As Russell Kirk notes in his introduction, throughout the nineteenth century, public men generally professed conservative assumptions, whatever their practical policies. Only with the ascent of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and continuing to recent years did liberalism begin to predominate in morals and politics.

Francis Wilson's slim volume was an expression of intellectual renewal of conservative ideas in the post-World War II period. Initially published in 1951, it gave expression to the body of common belief that then and now constitutes the essence of conservatism. Lucid and temperate he outlines the principles to which conservatives subscribe and how they have changed. Published in Russell Kirk's Library of Conservative Thought series, The Case for Conservatism has continuing relevance to those who would understand the intellectual roots of the contemporary revival of conservative public policies.

Individualism embraces a wide diversity of meanings and is widely used by those who criticise and by those who praise Western societies and their culture, by historians and literary scholars in search of the emergence of 'the individual', by anthropologists claiming that there are different, culturally shaped conceptions of the individual or 'person', by philosophers debating what form social science explanations should take and by political theorists defending liberal principles.

In this classic text, Steven Lukes discusses what 'individualism' has meant in various national traditions and across different provinces of thought, analysing it into its component unit-ideas and doctrines. He further argues that it now plays a malign ideological role, for it has come to evoke a socially-constructed body of ideas whose illusory unity is deployed to suggest that redistributive policies are neither feasible nor desirable and to deny that there are institutional alternatives to the market.

"Johnson examines the worth of liberal democracy and the question of cultural development by looking at novels by James Fenimore Cooper, Mark Twain, and William Dean Howells. Using the fictions to explore the richness of everyday life, he offers new insight into the relationship between the state and the individual"--Provided by publisher.

This study makes a major contribution to our understanding of one of the most important and enduring strands of modern political thought. Annelien de Dijn argues that Montesquieu's aristocratic liberalism - his conviction that the preservation of freedom in a monarchy required the existence of an aristocratic 'corps intermédiaire' - had a continued impact on post-revolutionary France. Revisionist historians from Furet to Rosanvallon have emphasised the impact of revolutionary republicanism on post-revolutionary France, with its monist conception of politics and its focus on popular sovereignty. Dr de Dijn, however, highlights the persistence of a pluralist liberalism that was rooted in the Old Regime, and which saw democracy and equality as inherent threats to liberty. She thus provides an alternative context in which to read the work of Alexis de Tocqueville, who is revealed as the heir not just of Restoration liberals, but also of the Royalists and their hero, Montesquieu.

And on your right, ladies and gentlemen, please observe The Conservative (Conservitus Americanus). This fascinating species in-habits vast territories across middle America, but rarely reveals itself in coastal urban areas. It is commonly believed to be uptight, humorless, and devoid of compassion, and is often characterized as racist, homophobic, and highly eco-unfriendly. Primary behaviors include unnecessary warmongering, tax cutting, and gun collecting. For decades, conservatives have proven to be hopelessly un-hip, and their mating habits dull. They are highly feared and often despised, for so few know and understand their true nature.

Get ready to meet the conservative next door or in the office down the hall, the person you never thought in a million years was one of "them." Lively, witty, and thought-provoking, Why You're Wrong About the Right blows the lid off the stereotypes that have long been associated with the American Right, and reveals the face of today's conservatives: an intellectually and philosophically diverse new breed of young, outgoing, smart, friendly professionals who live and work among liberals everywhere!

Themselves closet conservatives in Leftoid Land (aka Manhattan), S. E. Cupp and Brett Joshpe inject their own unique and colorful points of view into an honest dialogue on conservative ideas in American life and popular culture, and draw from interviews with a roster of renowned writers and political personalities, including Tony Stewart, Tucker Carlson, Brian C. Anderson, Laura Ingraham, Pat Toomey, David Horowitz, Ted Hayes, and many more.

Undercover conservatives, reveal your true colors with pride! Liberals, hug a conservative today! And whichever side you find yourself on, you'll be engaged, surprised, and happily re-educated when you discover Why You're Wrong About the Right.

The end of the Cold War ushered in a moment of nearly pure American dominance on the world stage, yet that era now seems ages ago. Since 9/11 many informed commentators have focused on the relative decline of American power in the global system. While some have welcomed this as a salutary development, outspoken proponents of American power--particularly neoconservatives--have lamented this turn of events. As Jeanne Morefield argues in Empires Without Imperialism, the defenders of a liberal international order steered by the US have both invoked nostalgia for a golden liberal past and succumbed to amnesia, forgetting the decidedly illiberal trajectory of US continental and global expansion. Yet as she shows, the US is not the first liberal hegemon to experience a wave of misguided nostalgia for a bygone liberal order; England had a remarkably similar experience in the early part of the twentieth century. The empires of the US and the United Kingdom were different in character--the UK's was territorially based while the US relied more on pure economic power--yet both nations mouthed the rhetoric of free markets and political liberty. And elites in both painted pictures of the past in which first England and then the US advanced the cause of economic and political liberty throughout the world. Morefield contends that at the times of their decline, elites in both nations utilized the attributes of an imagined past to essentialize the nature of the liberal state. Working from that framework, they bemoaned the possibility of liberalism's decline and suggested a return to a true liberal order as a solution to current woes. By treating liberalism as fixed through time, however, they actively forgot their illiberal pasts as colonizers and economic imperialists. According to Morefield, these nostalgic narratives generate a cynical 'politics in the passive' where the liberal state gets to have it both ways: it is both compelled to act imperially to save the world from illiberalism and yet is never responsible for the outcome of its own illiberal actions in the world or at home. By comparing the practice and memory of liberalism in early nineteenth century England and the contemporary United States, Empires Without Imperialism addresses a major gap in the literature. While there are many examinations of current neoliberal imperialism by critical theorists as well as analyses of liberal imperialism by scholars of the history of political thought, no one has of yet combined the two approaches. It thus provides a much fuller picture of the rhetorical strategies behind liberal imperialist uses of history. At the same time, the book challenges presentist assumptions about the novelty of our current political moment.

You can read books purchased on Google Play using your computer's web browser.

eReaders and other devices

To read on e-ink devices like the Sony eReader or Barnes & Noble Nook, you'll need to download a file and transfer it to your device. Please follow the detailed Help center instructions to transfer the files to supported eReaders.